w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Shiva Co-Operative House Building Society, H.P. v/s Soma Devi & Others

    Revision Petition No. 2840 of 2017

    Decided On, 14 January 2019

    At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN
    By, PRESIDING MEMBER

    For the Petitioner: Satish Kumar, A.R. For the Respondents: Arun K. Sharma, Byrapaneni Suyodhan, Advocates.



Judgment Text

Oral:

IA/7584/2018 (Legal Heir)

The respondent No.1 Smt. Soma Devi having expired, this application has been filed by the petitioner for impleading her legal representatives. Vakalatnama on behalf of the proposed legal representatives has already been filed and they have no objection to their impleadment. The application is therefore allowed and they are brought on record. An amended memo of parties be filed within four weeks. The application stands disposed of.

RP/2840/2017

Late Sh. Surinder Nath was a member of the petitioner society. As a member of the society, he had nominated late Smt. Soma Devi as his nominee. Late Sh. Surinder Nath had paid a sum of Rs.55,000/- to the petitioner society for allotment of a plot. The plot was not allotted to him in his lifetime. He died in the year 1998. The petitioner, however, did not transfer the membership of the society to late Smt. Soma Devi though it had come to know of the death of Surinder Nath by the year 2002.

2. After the death of late Sh. Surinder Nath, his wife Smt. Soma Devi deposited two amounts of Rs.10,000/- each with the petitioner society, the first deposit being on 6.12.1999 and the other being on 9.12.2002. The petitioner society passed a resolution on 18.9.2005, expelling late Sh. Surinder Nath from the membership of the society. A sum of Rs.10,000/- was thereafter deposited by Smt. Soma Devi on 28.9.2005. Thus the total amount deposited with the petitioner society by late Sh. Surinder Nath and late Smt. Soma Devi aggregated to Rs.85,000/-.

3. On the society passing the resolution dated 18.9.2005 expelling late Sh. Surinder Nath from the membership of the society and forfeiting the amount deposited with the society, a representation was made by late Smt. Soma Devi to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Una which directed the society the convene a General Body Meeting. The society accordingly convened a General Body Meeting on 5.9.2010. The General Body reiterated the resolution passed on 18.9.2005.

4. Being aggrieved, the complainant late Smt. Some Devi approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint seeking possession of a plot from the society.

5. The complaint was resisted by the society primarily on the ground that the further payment for the plot having not been made by late Sh. Surinder Nath, he was expelled from the membership of the society and the amount paid to the society was forfeited as per the bye-laws of the society.

6. The District Forum vide its order dated 22.7.2016 allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to restore the membership of the society to the complainant with all the rights. The petitioner was also directed to either allot the plot if available to the complainant or to refund the entire amount to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. w.e.f. 18.9.2005 and compensation quantified at Rs.20,000/- and the cost of litigation quantified at Rs.5,000/-.

7. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the District Forum, the petitioner approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. The said appeal having been dismissed, the petitioner is before this Commission.

8. A perusal of the reply filed by the petitioner before the District Forum shows that by the year 2002, the petitioner had come to know of the death of Sh. Surinder Nath. Even thereafter the petitioner society accepted a sum of Rs.10,000/- from his widow late Smt. Soma Devi on 9.12.2002. The society despite having come to know of the death of Sh. Surinder Nath, chose to pass a resolution expelling a dead person from its membership. The resolution expelling a dead person from the membership of the society was void and non-est in the eyes of law since a deed person could not have been expelled from the membership of the society. The appropriate procedure for the petitioner would have been to transfer the membership of the society to late Smt. Soma Devi she being the nominee of her husband, and then proceed against her in accordance with law. That having not been done, the expulsion was absolutely illegal, void, ab initio and non-est in the eyes of law.

9. It is an admitted position that a sum of Rs.85,000/- has been received by the petitioner from the complainant. This includes the amount of Rs.10,000 received from the complainant late Smt. Soma Devi on 28.9.2005, after a resolution had already been passed expelling her husband from the membership of the society. The president of the petitioner society states that they do not have a plot for being allotted to the legal representatives of the complainant late S

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

mt. Soma Devi who have been brought on record in her place. Therefore, the petitioner is required to refund the entire amount of Rs.85,000/- received by it from the late complainant and her late husband alongwith interest and compensation in terms of the order passed by the District Forum. The direction given by the Fora below, in these circumstances does not call for any interference by this Commission in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. The revision petition being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed.
O R